Today before we turn to our questions I want to talk about
some of the problems that we face. First of all yesterday I did
have the great privilege of having a long talk with President
Nixon.. and Dr. Kissingen I can assure you that those talks
could not have been more intimate and I could not have wished
that The President would have taken me into his confidence to
a greater degree than he did. Little was left unsaid and he
I did convince me that he is on the right track in trying to get
a rapprochement in world affairs and to try aiud get a reduction
in tensions so that we can divert our attention to the gcod life
and better opportunities for our citizens than to devoting
so much of our time and so much of our effort to the impediment
of var. No7 I've welcomed my discussions too with Mr Laird and
Mr Packard who will shortly go to Australia. I've welcomed the
discussions I've had with Secretary of State Rogers, who I think
I can claim is a personal friend and a man very Qell known to
me. In Australia we are building one society and I want to
emphasize this. We want one society united in mutual loyalty
but richly diverse in ethnic, religion and cultural back. rounds and
influences. As to our national development and the state of the
economy, I see ahead for Australia a remarkable prospect. 7e
have by good fortune, and I think too by good management, created
all the basic conditions that are the ingredient for success. I
don't know of any country that I have visited in recent years
and I've visited a great number of them but I don't know of ary
countxy that offers quite the same prospects as we do. So if aj of
you feel you would like to become immigrants to nj country just slip
a note up to Mr. President. Let me know your name and address and
I'll hand it on to one of my officials and see if you're w~ orthy
of becoming a member of my own press corps, particularly if
I feel that you're indulgent towards myself. 14ow as to the
basic ingredients for success. Our population is growing, our
economy is sopundly based. It has diversity and strength and our
national resources are not only immense, but they're growing day
by day. If you open the paper and don't find some newl discovery
that is likely to add to our wealth it's a strange day for the
press I can assure you. are too developin6 all those skills
that the technological age demands and through the combination of
all these qualities and virtues me are becoming a middle power. I
think ' we have a significance in the Pacific theatre that is out of
all proportion to the wealth that is being produced in my country.
I believe we are getting into this position of trust, a position
where people eousult us because they know that over the years we
have been S completely trustworthy and reliable ally. They know
that in terms of the aid programmes civil aid programes on an
official basis that we do at least as well as any other countxy.
pAnd v hen the numbers go up I can assure you that you will see that
our name in terms of performance per head of population is
regarded as remarkably good. As I came along one of your avenues
today, Independence Avenue, I couldn't help but ask myself -the simple
question " Wihy is it tha-t we don' -t parade this virtue of independence
and inter-dependence in the same ways you do here. We have the same
lusty vitality, the same desire to feel that we can express our
opinions and our views. Vie know too that in a world that's becoming
increasingly complex, in a world where you never know what is likely
to happen in the forty-eight hours that are to come, we also have
to have friends and allies. Consequently we want friends and allies wh(
are juist
as trustwiorthy and reliable as tie are ourselves. There are certain
factors in the Australian economy that ' we have had to 6ive some
considerable attention to in recent years, particularly over the
last twelve months. Not that these problems are singular
to Australia. I can assure you they are not, but we do. face the
problem in exactly the same way as you do. But re have cost
inflation and we have to a minor degree the appearance of a small
degree of unemployment that we feel that ' we have to overcome
as quickly as we can. We have certain other ~ economic problems
too that are not so much the direct consequence of internal
problems but are problems that arise as the resul. ofi our
relationship iith other countries and the changes that occur
in our trade, particularly lately the changes that have occurred in
our international currency situation. May I now turn to one
of your problems the one relating to the currency crisis.
First of all might I say that of course we understand your
position. For long the United States has, as it were, shcltered
more than a fair proportion of the burden of the world. Not
only in the way in which it has provided security for so many
countries but also because it has been a reserve currency able
to provide the additional international currency that it has
provided the free exchange of goods and services. We understood
therefore it " ias necessary not only that you should reduce the
burden of your defence effort but also that you should have
the opportunity to get a better balance in your payment
system. All that ' we had to decide was the amount of the
turn round that was necessary somewhere
near eight thousand billion dollars per year, but the
ways and means that turn round was to be achieved.
But I go on further to say this: that so far as
we are concerned we are not in a position where we
can be explicit about what our own intentions will
be because we are not a member of the group of ten. We
don't belong to working party three of the OECD.
Consequently un. til decisions are made by the countries
that have the decisive influence in world finance, it
is not sensible or prudent for us to be making up our
minds the way we'll go. On the contrary it seems
sensible that we keep all our options open. Wlhen
the major decisions are made, particularly on the DM
and the yen, we'll be able to make up our minds what
we are to do. What we do hope is that there is an
early re-alignment of currencies, and we hope, even
more importantly, that before that occurs that your
imports surcharge is removed and that trade will be
freer. This way people will have the stars by which
they can guide their economic fortunes, rather than the
mysteries of today that are confusing everyone. If the
difficulties remain for much longer then I think you can
have action by other countries in retaliation and a
hardening of ideas into dogmas that I think can do
damage to all of us. So I do hope therefore that we
will have changes and I hope that those changes take
place fairly quickly. I can assure you that in my
conversations with various members of your Administration
I learnt that they share exactly the same view as we
do in Australia.
The next economic issue is Britains entry into the
European community. For our part we have always C~~
accepted the right of the United Kingdom's Government
to make up its own mind what it thought was in its
best interests. Nevertheless, what we felt was that
Britain, with whom we have had so many years satisfactory
and reasonable trading relationships, would represent
our interests in the European community and try a a
and protect our exports into the Community countries,
particularly the primary imports to the maximum of our
capacity. But now we do find that there are these
growing trade barriers probably as much as $ 350 million
worth of our goods. We regard it as of critical importance
to us all that not only does Britain do its best
to represent our point of view and attempt to protect
our interests, but that we ourselves discuss with all
the European Community countries our problems, to enlist
support to see that there is a greater interchan:: e of
commodoties in the world. And. that far from being
isolationist and internal-looking that they. will be
outward-looking. And that the principles of the Kennedy
round of negotiations will once again be respeClted in
the world and that freedom of trade will become the
catch-phrase rather than the alternative.
May I now turn to our foreign policy and defence.
Because as I said last night at the dinner that was
given to me by the President: we believe in Australia
and I am sure you believe it to be true too that profound
changes are taking place in the policies and relationiships
of the super and middle powers. The KPeoples
Republic of China has now entered the United N~ ations
and ever since February of last year, continuing right
through to March and until representation was achieved
a few days ago, we have persisted with the poli'cy that
first of all the Peoples Republic of China should have
the permanent seat on the Security Council. At the
same time, because we believe in the principles of
the Charter itself and we believe in the Charter of
* universality, we wanted Taiwan also to remain a member
but a member of the General Assmebly. We-too look at
the Soviet Union with its increasing power and the
kowledge that it is a world power as well. It has L&
begun. starting to exercise that power -Ln a part of
* world the Indian Ocean. Up to the present moment it
has to be confessed that they have not had large fleets
there. Up to twenty vessels might be there at any one
time. They have pretty considerable afloat capacity and
they have some access to port facilities and to airfield
facilities. We understand just as well as anyone else
the reasons why they want this present. In some way
to counteract the influence of China, in some ways to
balance the influence of the to protect their own
trade interests, and we also believe to be able to make
some political influence on the littoral states if they
feel that the opportunity arises. For our part, and
on behalf of the U. K. we are watching this position very
carefully. Your Government has decided to put in a
signal station in the Diego Garcie, I think I could
take it for granted, although I have not V~ een given.
any concrete assurances about it that you yourself ril
have a counter balancing force there from time to time.
Not necessarily permanently based, but I believe you
will have a counter balancing force that will show to
the littoral states and show to the world that the U0
is prepared to live up to its obligations in the Indian
Ocean as well as it accepts the international burdens
of being the greatest of the western powers and the
greatest of the super powers as well. We are building
a naval base in south western Western Australia at
Cockburn Sound and a first class airfield at Learmouth.
We do hope the United States will be able to join with
us in the use of these facilities when elements of their
fleets might visit our shores. So too the United Kingdom
that has its small interests in South Africa and has also
agreed to take part with tte United States in the signal
station in Diego. Garcia. So you can therefore see that
we are there -the three of us are there not because
we believe that we have any offensive operations in
mind, but purely for defensive purposes. To show the
rest of the world that we are determined to support
the cause of freedom and make our contribution to freedom
whenever the opportunity should arise~. What I do say
to you is this: that we hope that in time our Asian
and Pacific neighbours will come to form a close-knit
community that will have a political weight and an
importance of its own. By that I mean that I do believe
that we have a degree of importance in the South-East
Asian countries that is out of all proportion to our
own industrial strength and our military capabilities.
But I believe that they think this way because of their
trust in us, but much more importantly believe in it
because they know that we feel that by creating an
Asian identity, by creating the feeling that in cooperation
we can be a deterrent to aggressive action by
insurgency and by other kinds of subversive operations.
By that means we can ward off attack and we can devote
increasing quantities of our assets to developments in
the future, particularly developments for those who
today suffer from hunger and the privations of a primitive
community,,
Might I come to the next and probably the last point
that I want to mention before questions are asked. I
want to again emphasise because it becomes an, article
of faith with my own people that whenever we are faced
with a problem, whether it is in security area cultural
relations, trade or finance, we do make up our own minds
what is in our interest. But I like to use the word
" independence" at the same time as I use the word interdependence.
It indicates the kind of attitude we have
to the world in which we live as well as the world
with which we have to associate. I
W~ hat re were doing provides a framework for cooperation
amongst several of the countries of Southeast Asia. In particular,
only a few days ago we have sig-ned or initialled a five part
agreement with Yalaysia, Singapore, the United Kingdom, New
Zealand and ourselves. And what we hope is that in time
our Asian and Pacific neighbours will come to form the same
kind of close knit community which will be similar to the five
power arrangements we have with the countries I've mentioned
and that will have political weight and importance of their
own. As we see it this will not be a military alliance or bloc
but a grouping of like minded countries engaged in close
cooperation for their mutual welfare and development whose
collective voice will count for something in the world. None
of this involves any reakening of our alliance with the United
States which remains, and I emphasise this as I emphasise it
again and again the sheet anchor of our security. Indeed we
would not be able to play our part in the security of our own
region without the support for our own defence efforts which
the ANZUS treaty provides. Yesterday, the President himself gave
his assurance in the clearest terms that the treaty was there to
stay and has continuing vitality. Our relationship with the
United States has been tested in conflict. Australia and the
United States have fought side by side in world wars, in Korea
and in Viet-Nam. W~ e have worked closely together for the
development and welfare of Southeast Asia and we enjoy the
closest cooperation and consultation in the day to day condaict
of our international relationships as my~ present visit has
underlined. Of course we make our own independent assessments of
particular situations and problems. T. e vigorously defend and
pursue our own national interests in the international 3cene
and in your bi-latera. relations. At times there are of course
differences between Australian and American assessments and between
particular Australian and American. interests but the sum of the
differences that mayr arise between us is small compared with the
interests re have in common, the ideals and objectives which
tie share. We see ourselves as a partner Pith the United States
in efforts to produce a durable world order and a balance in
which the medium sized and smaller powers will be able to consolidate
their independence and. live in peace. The support we offer is
the support of a significant and independent countxy in the
Asian and Pacific regions. A countzy grow~ ing in strength and
influence. In short 11Mr President, we see our relationships
not as an echo, not as a satellite but as a partner in the
Pacific. U
I also emphasise the very close and cordial relationships that exist
between your country and ours. At times, of course, there are differences
of opinion between us, but they axe not very great. It is the coimmon
interest we have and coimon ideals we have that I think are much more
important than the differences of opinion wherever they have occurred.
In the discussions that I have had with your Administration I have found a
very strong disposition to come to terms Pith us whenever I have raised
some difficulty that I think it would be better if we solved. And I
think as a result of the discussions I have had in the last few days we Pill
be able to talk on a more frank and, I believe, more sensiblc basio with
Mr. Packard and Mr. Stans and others when they come to Australia than Re
would have been able to do just a few weeks ago.
Question: Mr. Prime MiUnister. Is Australia worried about deteriorating
relations between the United States and Japan and the resulting effects
on security in the Pacific?
Prime Minister: Yes. We were worried about the ostensible deterioration
in relationships between Japan and the United States because we think that
there are five powers that must take place in a general rearrangement of
equilibrium in the world if we are to ensure the basic conditions of success
both in peace and in future developments and we Iaaow that Japan has to
play a particularly iniortant part in the Pacific theatre. I think that
when the first visit of Mr. Kissinger took place to Peking there was, I think,
a feeling not only of disappointment but almost of despair in the case of
Japan. And since the currency crisis and the ten per cent surcharge has been
imposed I think that the worries of Japan have become increasingly great.
Now it is our view that unless these problems of the currency crisis and
a freer exchange of goods and services take place then you are likely to
have a period of retaliation and you are likely to find, as I said in the
body of my speech, that the views that are held temnoarily can easily tur-n
into dogmas. I have discussed this -with the President; I have discussed it
' with other members of the Administration; they understand the position
equally as much as I do, and I think I can assure you they know the
necessity for a quick solution. But they also point out and I think it's
wise that I should point this out to you too that the answer doesn't fall
exclusively in the minds and the hearts and in the intelligence of the
~ American and the Japanese people. The EEC countries and particularly
France axe involved and consequently it is wise that we try and get a general
realignment, a general rearrangement of parities as wdll as getting the
import surcharge taken off at the earliest moment. Bthx it will not be of
great advantage to any of us if we find that some countries in the Group of
Ten, not Australia, because we are not a member of it, but if some countries
in the Group of Ten refuse to play their part, particularly refuse to play
their part in ensuring that there is a turn round of something of the order
of eight billion dollars in the balance of payments as between the United
States and the rest of the world.
Q~ iestion: What do you see as the future defence alliances in South East Asia
in the light of the United Nations vote and President Nixon's revised China
policy. Prime Minister: I don't think that there will be any general realignment of
security or military alignments in S. E. Asia because-the truth of the matter
is there is not one country there that is on its own or in combination with one
of its allies capable of defending itself against a major attack by one of
the super powers or one of the very great powers. The second point is that
I don't think the Nixon doctrine itself has undergone any change whatsoever
as a result of the new China policies or the meeting of the President with
the heirarchy in Moscow. I believe that this policy still holds good and it
is a policy identical with our own. Primary responsibility for defence
= awt reside basically with the country concerned but if in the case of
insurgency or subversion it becomes beyond their capacity it becomes an area
responsibility. After that I believe that is protection against attack by a
nuclear power, whether by nuclear weapons or otherwise, that the United
States will live up to its treaty obligations and its defence obligations.
Consequently I can't see the necessity for any great realignment in the
defence or security sense. I believe the position remains much the same as
it was before these general security realignments took place.
Question: Mr. Prime t-Unister. If Uncle Sam is moving into a balance of powe-.
with Red China where does this leave Australia?
Prime Minister: First of all I don't think that this ifteans that there could
be an alliance between the Peoples Republic and the United States. In myr
view the motive, in fact the sole motive behind the actions of the President,
is to try to get a balancing of power in order to ensure that countries
can look forward to the future free from the dangers of an imminent var and can
consequently devote more of their efforts to developing projects and to be
able to provide the under-developed countries of the woxld with better
opportunities for better living. In other -words I don't think for one moment
the U. S. ' wants to change its relationship with Japan. So far as we are
concerned I have received unqualified assurances from the President as well as
the Secretary of State that the ANZUS Treaty remains as valid today as it did
on the date on which it was signed. So I just want to, if I can, dismiss the
idea of any alignment of the U. S. or ganging up by the U. S. with the Peoples
Republic of China or Russia. On the contrary what he wants to ensure is that
there is a reduction in tensions and the countries, of course, that must
make the major, if not the sole contributions towards the reduction of tensions
is the U. S. S. R. and in particular too China as it moves into the nuclear age.
Question: Will you please expand on your reference to the dialogue with
China. How soon will relations be established?
Prime Minister: Our own?
Questioner: Yes.
Prime* Minister: This again is one of those questions that is extremely difficult
to answer. As long ago as February/ March last year I did ask myr Department,
I was then the External Minister, and later on I became the Foreign Minister
too, to develope a series of position papers relating to China, that is the
Peoples Republic to the U. S. S. R. and to Japan. We then decided not only
did we rant representation of China in the United Nations but that steadily
we should move toward bilateral improvement in our bilateral relationships
between China and ourselves. You will notice that I don't use the word 6
" recogaition" because I think that would be moving a little too quickly for
some sections of public opinion in Australia itself. I have also been
reminded by many people that when you are dealing with the Chinese they take
their time so you don't want to be in too great a hurry. For example
one country reminded us that it took sixteen years for them from the date they
started till the date recognition or the formalities of recognition were.
completed. So far as we in Australia are concerned we permit our own citizens
to move freely subject to security requirements. We have got a very liberal
trade attitude. Apart from strategic goods of a war-like character we permit
them to sell to us and for us to sell to them. In cultural and scientific
relationships there are no bars whatsoever. So far as we are concerned, leaving
defence and security out of it, there is complete freedom of movement and
restrictions are very very few. We do have some problems on trade. And at
once I think I sho" u I make it clear that if China has the opportunity to play
politics of course it will do so, but equally too if it believes it can get
advantage out of trade or other relationships with Australia or some advantage to
China, there might be greater advantages to ourselves, of course, it will
deal with it in a matter of fact and businesslike fashion. So me are there
ve have been negotiating with them in various countries and particularly in
Hong Kong. Wie haven't got very far in the improvement in our relationships
but the matter is in their hands if they indicate shortly that they would
like a trade mission to go to China or they would like officials of our own
G~ overnment to be associated with a trade mission ' we would take action, but
we are in no hurry. At every step we vill consider our own interests, our
own best interests, and what we should do in our best interests. We certainly
are not going to be creating the impression with the Peoples Republic of China
or the Government of the Peoples Republic of a great anxiety at any time
to have better relationships with them. Vie will do what we can but we ' Will
be just as patient as they are and above all we will be continually
considering Australia's major interests.
Question: Would Australia favour a U. S. military presence in South East
Asia after Vietnam and also what do you consider the prospects for peace
will be in Indo-China after the American withdrawal?
Prime M-inister: The first part of the question is very easy to answer.
But it is a question that should be directed to the United States Administ.-atio
and not to me, because in a country where I am a guest I think it is a little
imprudent to be offering suggestions to the gove rnm ent of that country as to
its conduct of either -diplomatic or military affairs. I believe in the
Bandung principle of non-interference in the affairs of other countries, but
speaking as it were at a press conference where I suppose everything will be
kept relatively secret, of course we want the American presence to remain
there just as long as it can and of course we want them even when ground
combat troops have been withdrawn. We would like them to maintain residual
air and naval forces providing the people of the United States feel that it is
proper and in the best interests of the Indo-Chinese people. As to the
question of the viability of Indo-China, or the four states of Indo-China,
from all that I have heard during the course of the last few days, and I
have been briefed at very senior levels, I think that both aspects of
Vietnamisation are turning out to be successful. First of all on the
military level your own advisers informed me that the poeple of South
Vietnam axe increasingly able to look after themselves, and the United States
Administration is determined on an aid programme that will give them the
opportunity for development programmes that in a civil sense permit them to
remain viable. As to our own efforts ve. have a very large civil aid programme
of the order of twenty five million dollars and vie have now under
consideration proposals for agreement in cooperation with N~ ew Zealand and
the United States proposals to establish or to participate in, training
centres both for advisers and for military training personnel. We will
do this in South Vietnam not only for the South Vietnamese but for the
Cambodians; in other words what I do say is this; that whereas five or six
years ago it looked as though it was impossible for South Vietnam and
Cambodia should remain independent and free. The prospects are much greater
today and with a little good fortune and a little good luck and provided
' we are able to give the civil aid programme what they need in a residual
capacity in terms of military effort,, then I think the prospects of success
are ever so much brighter than they were two three or four years ago.
Qaestion: Senator Muskie a likely Presidential candidate says that it
is only a matter of time before South Vietnam goes communist* Do you agree?
Prime Minister: If you express an opinion iike that frankly ittS one of
the occasions when I'm driven to despair. It would be a tragedy for this world
if after so mach American blood and effort had been spilled, after so mach
life has been lost, and such a tremendous effort has been devoted to the cause
of South Vietnam, of the right of the South Vietnamese people to determine
their own future, we should be so despairing as to think that all we have done
will turn out to be valueless and that the North Vietnamese and Viet Cong
r~ ill overrun South Vietnam and probably too Cambodia. I hope it doesn't occur.
I don't kn1ow on what grounds Senator LMuskic has made his views known other
than of course he is an aspirant for Presidential honouxs. But if I
emn take note of what was said yesterday by men I believe to be ever so much
better informed than he is, then in their views the prospects of survivial
are pretty good. I would be inclined to take their views ever so imch
more than I take the views of Senator Muskie. I
Question: Would Australia, and New Zealand and the free nations of South
East Asia feel more secure if the U. S. kept a permanent naval for-ce in the
Indian Ocean to counter Soviet influence in that area?
* Prime Minister: Not only can I give the most emphatic yes to this but it
would be a constant source of delight to me and as one who is given to
turbulence in the middle of the night I can assure you it would make my
life ever so much happier and my evenings ever so much more enjoyable.
qu~ estion: Do you have any reservations at all about f6reign investment in
Australia. If so, could you tell us what they are. Do you have any preference
between sources of capital inflow?
Prime Minister: Wie haven't any strong preferences for where capital comes from.
But what I can say about capital coming from North America is'that they, I
believe more than most other countries, want to live up to the basic principles
of overseas investment in Australia. First, we want increasing Australian
equity participation in corporative activities. Second, we want AostraliJans
to be able to participate in management and administration. For that reason wte
welcome American participation. We also welcome their technological Ikiowhox
and the contributions they have made particularly in the development of our
vast mineral deposits in the west andour Bass Strait oil deposits. I can't
in a question like this go right into the details, but American investment in
Australia is welcome to us providing only the provisions I _. entioned a few
moments ago are observed. * V'e do want greater Australian participation. WNe
do want greater Australian participation in management, but at the same time
we welcome American contributions to our future.
Q4uestion: One of your predecessors once said here regarding Vietnam
" all the way with LBJ". ould you now subscribe to the 1968 political assertion
that " Nixon's the one?" 1
Prime Minister: I think it would be indelicate of me and a kind of plagiarism
if I was either to copy or appear to be copying what was said by my predecessors.
And I don't know which one of my predecessors you're referring to in the last.
part of what you said. I think prudence demands that I keep my own counsel.
I coin imy own phrases and if before the next ouestion is asked I can think of
something even better but less provocative I will tell what it is.
Question: In view of Australia's strong protest to the* French over its
pacific nuclear testing programme do you propose to make similar protests
to the U. S. over its controversial underground test this weekend?
Prime Miniter: I think you can take it that our attitude has been ,: ade clear
in the agreements we have made. So far as nuclear testing in the atmosphere
is concerned we have protested no matter what country carries out nuclear
tests in the atmosphere. So far as underground tests are concerned wie have no
agreement and consequently we do not think that we are in a position legitiinatel
or according to international law, to make a protest. But we have also been
assured that these underground tests do not have the dangers or anywhere near
the dangers that can be carried out either in terms of pollution or danger to
life or limb that you have from atm~ ospheric tests. Consequently no protest
will be made by us. certainly anxiously enquire as to what the prospects
of pollution, what the prospects of danger might be, not only to Australia but
to the people of other countries as well.
Question: Has the all-white( IMj@ igtatinpolicy of Australia changed?
Prime Minister: I don't know that there ever wls an " all-white" policy in
Au stralia but I think I could say this to you, and it is worth while repeating.
Ibelieve that in my own country there is less of a feeling about racism than
in any other country I have visited. In short while there can be a lot of
discussion in the media and there can be a lot of provocative talk about it,
Australians do accept people of other races and other colours and they are an
extremely tolerant people. Tolerance probably isn't the right word. They
just happen to accept people and particularly they accept the people of
South East Asia. Nlow our policy is a quite clear one. We want one Australian
people. 11* wiean t those who come there to live permanently to be Australians.
We don't want little enclaves that can be a source of irritation or a source
of difficulty for us. Secondly vie do permit non-Europeans to come in providing
and providing only three qualifications are complied with. The first one is
that they have the skills that we need, the second one is that they will make
a contribution to our development. The third is that'-they are capable of
intergrating and in fact do become integrated with us so that in time,
particularly in the case of their children, it is impossible either to discern
the origins of their parents or that they have any other loyalty than loyalty
to the country in which they reside and in which they find their welfare. So
I just have to say this about any so-called rarticular Australian policy: it is
one that I think is wise and prudent. It is one that is not based upon racisim,
it is one that I believe that anyone who has been to the country will1 recog-nise
that the people are not given to racism but to welcoming people for w: hat they
are and what they are capable of contributing rather than the origins of their
parents. uestion: Prime Minister. The--ydney Opera House has been called Australia's
Fill. Which will get off the ground first? And also how does it compare with
the Kennedy Centre?
Prime Minister: Fortunately the opera house is on the ground and as yet we
haven't been able to get the 1ll off it so I can't in precise terms answer your
question. As to the Kennedy Centre and the opera house I don't think you can
compare them. The opera house, our opera house, is something completely novel
and astonishingly beautiful. You have got to see it; it is not built in
accordance with what I would regard as the Washington model. You see a building
that is rectangular, however beautiful it might be, but nonetheless it conforms
to classical Greek or Roman tradition. The opera house is entirely novel
and I wouldn't therefore like to make a comparison. But to each and everyone
of you who are here and you wouldn't be here if you weren't interested in
Australia the opening will be in 19735. I hope you will be able to have some
little investment in the future of Australia and by 1973 You will be able to
-have sold your investment and out of the profits attend the opening concert
when it appears. because I hore by that time not only wuill we have a good
orchestra but the best singers we are capable of taking from the United States.
Question: As England joins the Common Market won't this bring Australia and
New Zealand closer together?
Prime Minister: Vie are pretty close and the only time vie ever seem to, or we
appear to be disagreeable, is when it is suggested that New Zealand should
become the seventh State. But without saying it so that it can be heard in
New Zealand, we still look at them as the seventh State, but I don't think the
relationship between the two countries is capable of very much improvement today.
p( 4uestion: There are easy questions also. Will there be war between Pakistan
and India?
Prime Minister: I don't think that either the Government of India or the
Government of Pakistan want war. The real danger arises from the fact that the
people of East Pakistan are being trained in guerilla warfare and by accident
it could so happen that armed attack might occur either from the Pakistan army
or the freedom fighters in East iakistan itself. No one, I believe, can tell
you what the prospects are likely to be. What we must all do, and I will
certainly be playing my part ,41 will have the good fortune to talk to Mrs. Ghandi
tomorrow A, is to press with her and to press with the President Khian that
war must not take place. It can't benefit India, it can't benefit akistan and~
Zil
above all it cannot benefit any of the people of these two countries. Those
of us who feel we can play a part, however humble it might be, have got to
bring home to everyone the lesson that war will benefit no one. The sooner we
can persuade the Pakistanis to permit democracy or democratic regime to be
established under the Awarni League in -last Pakistan as part of a total Pakistan
solution, the better it will be. He has made his promise. I only hopne he will
be able to live up to it.
Question: The final question: what impelled you to buy the dress M'rs. Mc~ iahon
wore at the VWhite House last night?-
Prime M'inister: I know her better than anyone. I like the shape of her legs,
I like the look of her face, I like the fact that she chose me for her husband
at the same time I chose her to be my wife. V.' hen I happened to be walking past
a shop in Double Bay and saw a dress in black I then said to her I thought she
should buy it. That was six weeks ago, before the President had asked me to corm'
here, and before I knew the President was g iving a State Dinner in our honour.
When I beard of the dinner I gave instructions not that they matter very much
in my household but I gave instructions that she was to go down and have
the dress, not in black because i thought that there was nothing to mourn about,
but in white because this was something we could acclaim. And above all as
immediately before I had the good fortune to become the Leader of the Liberal
Party in Australia,-one of the assets I wa.; supposed to have was a photograph of
my wife with one leg projecting unnecessarily from a maxi shirt. I felt, well,
if you can have one split on the maxi side, well why couldn't she have two
sides it might be twice as good for me so there's the answer. I wish,
Sir, that I had known you were going to ask this question because as I chose
the dress, I practically designed the colour and insisted on the two splits up
the side, I think I could have ensure~ she wore it here today even though
it isn't the kind of dress that you would wear on an occasion similar to this.